Saturday, December 13, 2008 11:26
Defeat the tyranny of terror
In Guest Writers • 561 views • 10 Comments
Zafar H. Anjum
What we can and should do is to make our minds free of fear and prejudice and force our politicians to solve the festering wounds of the world.
We became the vicarious victims of terror for 60 hours while terror was let loose in Mumbai. The city was not virginal–hundreds had died there in various terrorist acts before. But the moment was—it became India’s 911.
After three days of fierce battling, the Indian commandos succeeded in ending the siege. Not just India, the whole world took a sigh of relief.
Shocked and grief stricken, people could begin to think of food and sleep. Some wiped the tears off their faces and decided to move on with life. Others seethed with anger—at the impotence of the system—a system that failed to protect citizens from repeated carnage of terror.
There was intelligence that warned the authorities of the impeding attack. How could the system let such warning pass? Why did they not act in time?
Enough is enough, said angry citizens. We don’t want words, we want action, they demanded of the country’s leaders. Heads rolled, politicians at the state and union’s level resigned.
Meanwhile, after the 60 hours of live reporting, the media moved on the act II. There began the parade of armchair terror experts and page 3 personalities. Politicos were added to the combo to balance the debate on terror. The whole system was found guilty. And the attack’s culpability was thrown into the backyard of Pakistan where it always belongs.
While all this debate and shouting made good television, one thing was completely lost– the message that the terrorists had brought with their bullets.
Global terror comes to India
Whatever group the Mumbai terrorists belonged to—Lashkar-e Toeba, Jaish-e Mohammad or Al Qaeda—the message was clear: global terror had come to India, as it had come to the UK and Pakistan, the allies of the global super power America.
This time it were not homegrown terrorists—Muslims or Hindus trapped in the cycle of communal vengeance—who had come, planted the bombs and melted away in the crowds. These were Al Qaeda style fidayeens (suicidal terrorists) who were there to create a spectacle, sure to get carried away on radio and television waves to the far corners of the world. They could not create another 911 in New York or Sydney or Shanghai because of the tight security in those cities, so they chose Mumbai—a soft target.
In other words, it was not national terror—it was global. Any country, any citizen was the target. That’s why they targeted the Americans, the British and the Israelis. That’s why a Singaporean became the first victim of global terror. Indians who were killed at the railway stations or other places were perhaps fodder to divert the attention of the police. This allowed the terrorists to take hostages at the tourist rich places—The Taj, Oberoi and the Nariman House.
And what did the terrorists rant about? The persecution of Muslims in India and the festering Kashmir problem. Stop persecuting Muslims in India, they told TV stations. They had no other demands.
It is not just about Kashmir or Pakistan
It were these demands, these assertions by the terrorists that got relatively suppressed in the media chatter about intelligence failure and government irresponsibility and body counts.
We all know that Kashmir, Afghanistan and Palestine conflicts are festering wounds that have bedeviled life and politics in South Asia and the Middle East. But why would the Muslims in India want ‘global terrorists’ to bring home the message of their persecution to the Indian government’s attention?
No matter what, Indian Muslims would never want any terrorist—domestic or international—to articulate their woes and tribulations. They can and they are fighting within the democratic system of India to right the perceived ‘wrongs’ done to them. And they are doing it along with millions of liberal Hindus who empathize with their problems.
That’s why, perhaps in a show of pop patriotism, Muslims of Mumbai refused to open the doors of their cemetery when the police sought to bury the bodies of the nine dead terrorists. These terrorists who killed innocent people cannot be Muslims, they argued.
The terrorists who came to fight in the name of Indian Muslims or Islam were not friends of Muslims or Islam. That’s why it is important to delink terror with Islam. Terrorism is terrorism. Period.
Islam as the only competing vision?
Why then the terrorists are playing this game? The Palestinians fight for Palestine, the Chechens for Chechnya, and the Kashmiris for Kashmir?
Then why are the ‘global terrorists’ bringing the ‘Jihadi’ fight to the country with the second largest population of Muslims in the world?
This is very important to understand as its implications will be grasped only in the next few decades.
As I have said before, this ‘global terrorism’ is not just about Kashmir or Palestine. It probably started from these grouses but I think the game plan has changed. Despite the efforts of Al Qaeda and its acolytes (whoever envisions the world domination of Islam and the end of the international system that we have now), majority of Muslims in the world have by and large remained peaceful. They have denounced the Jehadi elements, the misguided suicidal sickos that wage war with terror in the name of Islam.
The lack of Muslim response to their cause has made the ‘global terrorists’ desperate. In desperation, they have gone for a far more sinister plan—if you can’t alienate the Muslims for global Jihad, make everyone else hate the Muslims, then they themselves will get alienated. Make things so worse that everywhere people will begin to equate Islam with terror. Then Muslims will be cornered. Muslims then will have no choice but to get radicalized and that’s when the clash of civilizations will take place. Radical Islam against the capitalist-globalised-liberal democratic world—the world of pure Islam against the ‘consumption and fornication’ fuelled world of the West and its satellite states. After all, other than Islam, which other world religion provides a banking, financial, moral and system of jurisprudence of its own?
This is the game plan now. And they are achieving this bit by bit, with every terror attack. The charge of terror is ionizing the populations—the poison is slowly spreading without people barely noticing the phenomenon.
The only way to defeat this ‘global Jehad’ is for ‘frightened’ people and governments to understand this game plan and take corrective measures.
As global terror expert Brian Michael Jenkins says, frightened populations are intolerant. They worry incessantly about subversion from within. In the case of India, it could mean the subversion by 150 million Muslims from within. In the case of USA, subversion by 5 million and in Europe’s case, subversion by 53 million Muslims, and so on. To make things worse, there already are active elements everywhere that demonize the Muslims as a community or are Islamophobic. They will act as the nature allies of the terrorists.
Security not an anti-dote to terror
To borrow another line from Jenkins, security is necessary but security alone is not an antidote to terror. It is imperative for governments to step up security and beef up intelligence gathering but more needs to be done.
There are already reports that the next 911 might be nuclear. Will terrorists go nuclear? Will they use biological or chemical weapons? Who knows but fear mongering always works. Even for terrorists, it is easier said than done. Kitchen table nuclear bombs are myths, as Jenkins says.
The bottom-line is that no amount of security or preparation can completely stop mad terrorists unleashing terror somewhere in the world. What we can and should do is to make our minds free of fear and prejudice and force our politicians to solve the festering wounds of the world, starting from our own country, to build a just world order. If we do that, ‘global terror’ of this nature will die its own death.
Let me finish my rant by quoting Jenkins from the last chapter of his book, Will Terrorists Go Nuclear? (Prometheus Books, 2008):
“We can behave like frightened sheep, content to fill our stomachs while we are herded about by terrorists and cynical politicians who chip away at our liberty. Or we can behave as citizens whose first mission is to defeat the tyranny of terror. If we value democracy, our choice is clear.”
——————-
About the author:
Zafar Anjum (www.zafaranjum.com) is an Indian writer and journalist based in Singapore. These are his personal views.
———
Related posts:
10 Comments
Loyola
JohnnyKid
This religious war is not new and has been ongoing for centuries. In the ancient past where religion is a major part of a person’s life, leaders are able to summon huge armies by appealing to their religion.
Science has advanced in huge leaps and we are becoming more secular and rational. Huge armies can no longer be raised and the wars have gone guerrilla.
My personal thought is that it will take another few centuries before peace can be achieved.
bismarker
terrorism is terrorism is not islam is correct.
but it doesn’t mean that it occurs when mad men group together. The spectacle might be global yes, but that doesn’t mean the roots cannot be local.
As for the point regarding home grown terrorists, well, there are always assertions about Indian Muslims being involved. That doesn’t mean that it’s because of religion, but it also means there might be some genuine concerns there that perhaps along the way of classifying these madmen, that we overlook where they came from.
Lim YH
Given the harsh sedition laws we have in Singapore, let me just pretend that I agree to the politically correct stance that the terrorists have nothing to do with their religion.
Good article. I’m glad to read this on TOC.
But I don’t agree that the Mumbai attacks can be lumped together with the Al Qaeda attacks of 9/11. This is primarily a political conflict between India and Pakistan. It’s just unfortunate that the foreigners got caught in between. Unlike AQ, LeT is not trying to set up an Islamic state that spans the globe. They are primarily concerned with getting back Kashmir from India. Therefore resolving this kind of terror cannot happen without the Kashmir issue being settled. As long as Kashmir dispute festers, LeT will continue to recruit members. What do you expect them to do with their thousands of members in between Indo-Pak wars?
SZ
Well, Plato did say this “It is only the dead who have seen the end of war” and as long as there are mankind around, they will sought war for one reason or another.
puppy
Well, if there is no religion to cause war, there will be territorial disputes, money disputes, racial disputes and even love disputes.
Where on Earth is there peace?
puppy
jefj0901
I believe the conflict is more local than global. The demands are quite straightforward when they told the press that India should leave Kashmir alone. The killings are cold blooded and with true effects to ensure India stood up and take notice.
They won’t take no for an answer. And I believe, this time religion takes the back seat.
[...] Defeat the tyranny of terror The Online Citizen, Singapore [...]
island dog
“ After all, other than Islam, which other world religion provides a banking, financial, moral and system of jurisprudence of its own?”
I really do not know what you are trying to say here.
But these are my personal thoughts
1) In Malaysia , where religion has intervened with its system of jurisprudence , what are your thoughts of a person who wants to convert from Islam to christianity (formerlly she was a christian) . What law should we apply here? Sharia or Civil Law?
2) In Malaysia , caning for a girl who drink beer . Sharia law . But there are thousands who smoke Ganja . Civil law punishes them but what about sharia law ? what is the punishment in sharia law for intake of ganja?
3)Indonesa : There is a cleric who married a 12 year old girl (the girl’s parents approved it ). Cleric claims nothing is wrong in marrying the little according to sharia law. Thus civil law came into the protect the girl. So , who is right ? sharia or civil law?
I think there are many examples I can list but please do insubordinate other religions by using such statements . Please read the text of other religions (non abrahmic religions) and you will be amazed at the depth .

The global Salafist-inspired terrorism is a clear and present danger to the entire international order.
We will not be safe. This is a long war against extremism, the Cold War for Generation Y. It is a battle for the world we want to leave to our children.
I would say, perhaps we are all unconventional warriors. From how I see it, this conflict will not be solved by mere military-security channels. It is a battle of ideas, of hearts and minds.
I hope we win. For our children’s sake, we have to.